Christian science exposed

Preface

Some years ago the writer began to study "Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures" in the spirit of Christian fairness, determined if the cult was found worthy, to defend it, and if convinced that the book was heretical,, to expose it.

This investigation resulted in the preparation of four lectures, which were delivered from the pulpit in the Mulkey Memorial Church of the City of Fort Worth. Subsequently these lectures were extended in scope and published in the "Medical Courier Journal" of this city, edited by Kent Kibbie, M. D., in a series of articles, then reprinted in pamphlet form. Unfortunately, the proof was not corrected, and of course there were many typographical errors which, in some instances, destroyed the sense of the paragraph.

This called for a revision of the tractate, resulting in the book herewith offered to the public. This book is predicated upon "Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures," "Miscellaneous Writings," and "Eetrospection and Introspection" by Mrs. Mary Baker G. Eddy. These books contain the doctrines of Christian Science; in fact, the first named is the text book of the sect — their Bible — being supreme authority. Mrs. Eddy's writings are scrappy, illogical, incoherent, mythical, incongruous and ambiguous to such an extent that it takes much study to develop an intelligent comprehension from this heterogeneous mixing of words.

In order to avoid the charge of garbling and misrepresentation the writer has quoted extensively from Mrs. Eddy's pen. The passages cited are taken from different parts of the books reviewed and collated on the various phases of her

4 Preface

doctrine treated in this book. The author has striven to accomplish three definite purposes; first, to present a clear analysis of Christian Science so-called, that the reader need not stop to read through the conglomerated mass of tautology and redundancy contained in the writing of Mrs. Eddy to ascertain what Christian Science really is; second, to refute effectually every claim advanced by Mrs. Eddy; and third, to answer the contention of Christian Scientists and at the same time to present a succinct orthodox statement on the various biblical doctrines herein defended.

In accomplishing this task "Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures" and the Bible have been chiefly relied upon; but a number of books have been consulted more or less. Among these there should be mentioned: "The World's Parliament of Religion;" "Faith Healing, Christian Science and Kindred Phenomena" by Dr. Buckely ; "The Law of Psychic Phenomena" by Hudson ; "Religion and Medicine" by Worcester, McComb, Coriat; "Searchlights on Christian Science," which is a symposium by ten writers; "Practical Lessons in Hypnotism," by W. W. Gook, A. M., M. D.; "Hypnotism As It Is," by X. Lamotte Sage, Ph. D., LL. D.; "Mental Medicine," by Rev. W. F. Evans; "Christian Science in the Light of the Holy Scriptures," by Haiderman; "Christian Science, Is It Safe?" by Whittaker; Mark Twain on "Christian Science;" "The True History of Mental Science," by Julius A. Dresser; "The Philosophy of P. P. Quimby," by Anetta G. Dresser; "Health and the Inner Life" by Horatio W. Dresser. "The Life of Mary B. G. Eddy and History of Christian Science," by Georgine Milmine. All these books are adverse to Christian Science.

"The Life of Mary Baker G. Eddy," by Sibyl Wilbur has also been carefully read. Sibyl Wilbur appears as Mrs. Eddy's advocate and tries to explain the many charges

Preface 5

brought against her subject; but in fact, her book consists of misrepresentations and perversions of facts. She brings no supporting testimony to sustain the bare negations, or mere affirmations with which her production abounds. Julius A. Dresser and his wife, Anneta G. were patients of Dr. Quimby when Mrs. Eddy put herself under his treatment at Portland, Me. Mr. Dresser was Mrs. Eddy's first teacher of mental healing in connection with Quimby. Horatio W. Dresser is the son of J. A. and Annetta G. Dresser. He remembers Mrs. Eddy and all the circumstances connected with her visits to Quimby. As will be observed these writers are all followers of Quimby and therefore competent witnesses respecting Quimby and his doctrine and Mrs. Eddy's relation thereto. Eev. W. F. Evans was also healed by Quimby and at once adopted his theory of healing and became a follower of him. He was an author before going to Quimby and a man of considerable ability. The writer has used every care to secure and present the facts and has sought to get the most reliable information. Georgine Milmine's "Life of Mrs. Eddy" has been especially helpful in that it furnishes direct testimony which will stand the test of any court of justice. She went on the ground and not only conversed with many people who had known Mrs. Eddy, but some who had had dealings with her. She secured affidavits in some instances to support her statements.

The author has only one desire in presenting this book to the public — the vindication of the truth and preservation of the faith of the fathers. Among the followers of Mrs. Eddy he has some warm personal friends. Doubtless, many embrace Christian Science before they understand what they are going into; and when they once embrace the doctrine, it becomes exceedingly difficult to dislodge them. That there is a true scientific mental process of healing there can be

6 Preface

no doubt. Evidently as the years go by mental medicine will become more popular, but to the unbiased student "Christian Science" must ever appear antagonistic to science and religion.

The quotations from "Science and Health with a Key to the Scriptures" found in this book refer to the two hundred and seventh edition, published in 1901. When no book is named but figures given, the reference is to "Science and Health." In quoting from Mrs. Eddy's writings, I have followed her verbatim. From time to time, new editions of this book have been issued, all containing changes and rearrangements of chapters, changes confusing to readers who may undertake to find passages cited by different critics. This book is submitted to the public not for its literary value, but as a true statement of the history involved and as a faithful analysis of Christian Science; and it is sent forth with the earnest desire that it may meet the demands of the hour.

Author.

Contents

CHAPTEE I.

A Sketch of Mrs. Mary Morse Baker Glover Patterson Eddy. — When and where born. — An invalid.— Education limited. — Claiming early piety. — Not true. — Hysteria and bad temper. — Caused trouble in families where she boarded. — Marriages. — Mrs. Eddy's writing and teaching. — Difficulties with her students. — Publishes her book. — Sale of her book. — Witchcraft. — Her hatred of those who left her. — Eddy arrested and tried. — Her attitude towards her son. — Abandoned by her husband. — Gets divorce and marries again. — Lived in dread of Mesmerists. — A Spiritualist.

CHAPTEE II.

CHAPTER 1. Life op Mary Morse Baker Glover Patterson Eddy

On the 16th day of July, 1821, in the village of Bow, N. H., Mary Baker made her advent into the world, in some particulars the most remarkable woman who has come upon the stage of action in recent years. She was born with a frail body, in obscurity, in a home of moderate means and without culture. Early in young womanhood, she was by fortuitous circumstances reduced to abject poverty and made a pensioner upon the liberality of relatives. Although a helpless invalid and without an income even to meet the returning demands of life, yet she has become a millionaire of more than national fame. Others would have failed where she has succeeded. In accounting for her success many things are to be considered. The first and chief of which is the credulity of a certain class of people, who are ready to embrace anything that is new, especially should it contain an element of mysticism.

Mary, as she was called in the family home, was the youngest of six children, three sons and three daughters; she was the petted and spoiled member of the household. Her education was limited; she was not fond of books, but selfassertive and presumptious. Mrs. Eddy says: "My father was taught to believe that my brain was too large for my

body and so kept me much out of school At ten years of

age I was as familiar with Lindley Murray's Grammar as with the Westminster catechism; and the latter I had to repeat every Sunday. My favorite studies were Natural Phiis losophy, Logic, and Moral Science. From my broJier Albert I received lessons in the ancient tongues/ Hebrew, Greek, Latin. After my discovery of Christian Science, most of the knowledge I had gleaned from schoolbooks vanished like a dream." (K. & I. p. 20.) If we were to accept the first part of this statement as true, the latter part we can not accept without the most conclusive proof, which is totally absent; and the writer after carefully studying the character of Mrs. Eddy can not accept any statement she makes without extrinsic evidence.

Georgine Milmine says, "The writer has talked with scores of Mary Baker's contemporaries in the New Hempshire villages where she lived." (G. M. P. 15). This witness, having had opportunity to converse with the early contemporaries of Mrs. Eddy and to look minutely into Mrs. Eddy's early history, must be regarded as a competent witness. This consideration gives weight to the following extracts :

"As Mary grew older she was sent to district school with her sisters, but only for a few days at a time, for she was subject from infancy to convulsive attacks of a hysterical nature" (G. M. p. 12). Her father moved from Bow in 1836 near to a place now called Tilton. Her old schoolmates say that she was indolent and spent her time lolling in her seat or scribbling on her slate and apparently was incapable of concentration or continuous thought. 'I remember Mary Baker very well/ said one of her classmates, now living in Tilton. 'She began to come to district school in the early summer of 1836. I recollect her very distinctly because she sat just in front of me, and because she was such a big girl to be in our class. I was only nine, but I helped her with her arithmetic when she needed help. We studied Smith's Grammar and ciphered by ourselves in Adam's New Arithmetic, and when she left school in three or four weeks we had both reached long division. She left on account of sickness/" (G. M. pp. 16, 17). "Mrs. Eddy's schoolmates are not able to reconcile her story with their own recollections. They declare frankly that they do not believe Albert Baker taught her Hebrew, Greek and Latin." (G. M. p. 18).

Her lack of education is the more apparent when it is understood that Mrs. Eddy's manuscript required much correcting on the part of editors and printers to make it intelligent to the reader. In 1885, Eev. James H. Wiggins, a Unitarian clergyman, became literary sponsor for Mrs. Eddy and revised the manuscript for the 1886 addition of S. & H., which he largely rewrote. After stating the interview that Eev. Wiggins had with Mr. Calvin Fry, Mrs. Eddy's secretary, and later with Mrs. Eddy herself relative to the manuscript, Georgine Milmine says, Mr. Wiggins sought a second interview with "Mrs. Eddy and told her that he could do nothing by merely correcting her manuscript; that to improve it he would have largely to rewrite it. To his surprise she willingly consented to this." (G. M. p. 328). This appears to be well authenticated and is corroborated by a comparison with previous editions. The syntax of these editions is so illy constructed as to render them almost unintelligible.

Mark Twain claims that Mrs. Eddy did not write "S. & H.," because she had not the ability to do so. He says "The known and undisputed products of her pen are a formidable witness against her. They do seem to me to prove, quite clearly and conclusively, that writing, upon even simple subjects, is a difficult labor for her; that she has never been able to write anything above third-rate English; that she is weak in the matter of grammar; that she has but a rude and dull sense of the value of words; that she so lacks in the matter of literary precision that she can seldom put a thought into words that express it lucidly to the reader and leave no doubts in his mind as to whether he has rightly understood or not; that she cannot even draft a Preface that a person can fully comprehend, nor one which can by any art be translated into a fully understandable form; that she can seldom inject into a Preface even single sentences whose meaning is uncompromisingly clear — yet Prefaces are her specialty, if she has one. Mrs. Eddy's known and undisputed writings are very limited in bulk; they exhibit no depth, no analytical quality, no thought above a school composition size, and but juvenile ability in handling thoughts of even that modest magnitude. She has a fine commercial ability, and could govern a vast railway system in great style; could draft a set of rules that Satan himself would say could not be improved on — for devilish effectiveness — by his staff; but we know, by our excursions among the Mother Church's By-laws, that their English would discredit the deputy baggage-smasher. I am quite sure that Mrs. Eddy cannot write well upon any subject, even a commercial one." (Pp. 288, 289.)*

Mrs. Eddy and her biographer, Sibyl Wilbur, would tax our credulity by extravagant statements of Mrs. Eddy's early piety, their object being of course to impress the susceptible with the thought that Mary was peculiarly a child of destiny — to the intelligent reader such twattle is silly. Mrs. Eddy says, "Many peculiar circumstances and events connected with my childhood throng the chambers of memory. For some twelve months, when I was about eight years old, I repeatedly heard a voice calling me distinctively by name, three times in an ascending scale." She proceeds to give a detailed account of this incident, how her mother finally read to her the story "of little Samuel" and instructed her to answer as did he and that having done so "Never again to the material senses was that mysterious call repeated." (Ret. and Intro., p. 19.) She says, "At the age of twelve I was

*See Appendix A.

admitted to the Congregationalist (Trinitarian) Church. . . . My father's relentless theology emphasized belief in a final Judgment Day, in the danger of endless punishment, and in a Jehovah merciless toward unbelievers." In this connection she claims to be narrating what occurred between her and her father pending her reception into the Church. She speaks of how she revolted at such horrible doctrines, how she disputed with the pastor when he expounded the usual questions, how she stood her ground; then she adds, "He received me into their communion, and my protest along with me/' (Retro. & Intro., pp. 22-25).

Mrs. Eddy framed her story evidently to impress the reader, that her history furnished a parallel with both Samuel and Christ. Her historian repeats these stories and expatiates upon them. Unfortunately for the Eddyites there appears a discrepancy in dates, between Mrs. Eddy's own statement and that of Sibyl Wilbur her apologist who says: "However, it was not until the age of seventeen that she was united with the Congregational Church." (Life of Mrs. Eddy, p. 31.) The question arises, why should Mrs. Eddy's great admirer, a writer who exalts her subject to the altitude of a spotless Saint, publish in cold type the statement of a fact, which contradicts the printed statements of Mrs. Eddy ? The explanation is at hand. George milmine wrote a series of articles on Christian Science which were published in the McClure's Magazine from 1907 to 1908, and which have been revised and published in book form. On the twentieth page of this book can be found the following: "The official record bearing on this point, taken from the clerk's book of the Tilton Congregational Church, is as follows: 1838, July 26th, Received into this Church, Stephen Grant, Esq., John Gilly and his wife, Hannah, Mrs. Susan French, wife of William French, Miss Mary A. M. Baker, by profession, the two former receiving the ordinance of baptism. Greenough McQuestion, Scribe." Mrs. Eddy was born July 16th, 1821; so her apologist was obliged to admit when confronted with the record that Mrs. Eddy had misrepresented the date of her admj^sion into the Church. Let it be understood that Sibyl WiJLbur's Life of Mrs. Eddy was copyrighted in 1907-1908 by the writer, and while not ostensibly a reply to Georgine Milmine's Life of Mrs. Eddy, yet it i s . covertly such. The reader will soon learn to question every thing that Mrs. Eddy says of a remarkable nature which tends to attest her high claim of piety, wisdom and divinity.

In considering Mrs. Eddy's traits of character from childhood to old age, we are forced to view her in any other aspect than that of probity, sincerity, integrity, veracity, not to mention piety. Note the discrepancy of five years in Mrs. Eddy's positive statement, that she disputed with the Congregational minister on doctrinal points when she was received into that church at the age of twelve, and the record which proves she was seventeen years of age. S. Wilbur tries to make it appear that the minister propounded the questions when Mrs. Eddy was twelve years old, but she was not received into the Church until five years later. The attempt is a failure, however, and Mrs. Eddy stands condemned by the record.

From childhood, Mrs. Eddy presented an air of vanity and sought to be peculiarly different in mannerism from other people. She was fond of boasting of her own endowments and achievements and of "blue blood." She exhibited a striking vanity for dress and the adjustment of her hair, that ringlets might be conspicuous and such outward ostentations as made her unpopular among the girls. Georgine Milmine enters into detail in depicting her traits of character, learning the same from Mrs. Eddy's former schoolmates with whom she conversed. Along with an indomitable will she possessed a bad temper which she has exhibited throughout life. She inherited her iron will from her father, who is said to have been inexorable in his purposes. Mrs. Eddy's outbursts of temper often terminated in nervous paroxyms, or "fits." When she could not carry her point otherwise, she found hysteria an efficient means in accomplishing her purpose.

"These attacks, which continued until very late in Mrs. Eddy's life, have been described to the writer by many eyewitnesses, some of whom have watched by her bedside and treated her in Christian Science for her affliction. At times the attack resembled convulsions. Mary fell headlong to the floor, writhing and screaming in apparent agony. Again she dropped as if lifeless, and lay limp and motionless, until restored. At other times she became rigid like a cataleptic and continued for a time in a state of suspended animation. At home the family worked over her and the doctor was sent for, and Mary invariably recovered rapidly after a few

hours Outside the family, Mary's spells did not

inspire the same anxiety. The unsympathetic called them

'tantrums/ and declared that she used her nerves to

get her own way (her father) Mark Baker, came to

share this neighborhood opinion in later years A

neighbor, passing the house one morning, stopped at Mark's gate and inquired why Mary, who was at that moment rushing wildly up and down the second-story piazza, was so excited ; to which Mark replied bitterly : 'The Bible says Mary Magdalene had seven devils, but our Mary has got ten !' " (Gen. Mil., pp. 21,22.)

Doubtless Mrs. Eddy was of a mercurial temperament, with highly wrought nerves which were more or less abnormal, so as to render her almost intolerant to contradiction or opposition, and this characteristic obtained with her throughout life. Mrs. Eddy's apologist does not deny that the report did obtain that Mary had a bad temper, but she seeks to limit the allegation to one particular occasion and to the subject of religion. "The silly gossip of the world reported that she would not study her catechism. They said that

Mary had a high temper for all her learning They

even said that Mr. Baker had reported in his anguish to his clergyman, 'If Mary Magdalene had seven devils, our Mary has ten/" (Syb. Wilbur, p. 30). Instead of Mrs. Eddy's defender producing evidence to refute the charge of bad temper, she acknowledges that Mr. Baker is reported to have made the remark imputed to him. Mrs. Eddy's last husband confided to Mrs. Eice, who was at that time a staunch Christian Scientist, that he did "not believe that God Almighty could please his wife."

In pursuing Mrs. Eddy's history, the question arises why did she change her boarding place so often for several years following the year 1864? The solution of the question will be found in Mrs. Eddy's bad temper, and her disposition to dominate even to the extent of interrupting the marital relation in families. It is important to investigate this question. Mr. H. S. Crafts was one of Mrs. Eddy's first students and the first one to begin to practice the Quimby theory of mental healing; his card bears the date May 13, 1867, at which time he began to practice in Taunton. He worked in a shoe factory at the time Mrs. Eddy first met him at a boarding house in Lynn. She soon succeeded in getting him interested in Quimby's theory; for at this time Quimbyism was the chief topic of her conversation. Crafts was a spiritualist and was much interested in psychic phenomena. When he returned to his home in East Stoughton, he invited Mrs. Eddy to come to his home and teach him Quimby's method of healing. This she did and, as was usual with her, she created trouble in the family. Ira Holmes was Mrs. Crafts' brother. In Georgine Millmine's Life of Mrs. Eddy is to be found a lengthy affidavit made by Mr. Holmes before Geo. 0. Wentworth, Notary Public, Feb. 7th, 1907, in Stoughton, Mass., from which the following is taken: "While Mrs. Patterson lived in the house of Mr. and Mrs. Crafts, she caused trouble La the household, and urged Mr. Crafts to get a bill of divorce from his wife, Mary Crafts. The reason that Mrs. Patterson gave for urging Mr. Crafts to divorce his wife was, that Mrs. Crafts stood in the way of the success of Mr. Crafts and Mrs. Patterson in the healing business. Mrs. Crafts, my sister, was gentle, kind, and patient, and in no way merited Mrs. Patterson's dislike of her." (Geo. Mil., pp. 113, 114).

Turning to Mrs. Eddy's apologist, we find her statements increase our suspicion. She says, "The wanderings of the next few years need not have occurred, but for those inherent traits deep in human nature which show themselves as jealousy, envy, and resentment. Perfectly natural as an exhibition of human nature was the gradual revelation of Mrs. Crafts' state of mind. She resented playing the role of

Martha in this household Mrs. Crafts' jealousy

which was only increased as the days drifted by and the life

they all lived was shown to be without blame Her

jealousy may be regarded as natural by many, but it was certainly most unfortunate in that it presently cut off the development of her husband's work, and broke the continuity of Mary Baker's. ..... But doubting relatives filled

Mrs Crafts with dissatisfaction and suspicion It

brought about strained relations in the household and made a new adjustment of conditions necessary." (S. W., pp. 162, 165).

Let the reader note that Mrs. Eddy's defender, Sibyl Wilbur does not in any way controvert the oath of Mr. Ira Holmes, brother of Mrs. Crafts ; but on the contrary she admits the disturbance and that strained relations were brought about "in the household" by Mrs. Eddy, which she attributes to Mrs. Crafts' jealousy and finally to "doubting relatives" who "filled Mrs. Crafts with dissatisfaction and suspicion." The fact is S. Wilbur had a difficult problem before her; and in seeking to solve it, she increased the suspicion contained in the Holmes' testimony.* No doubt Mrs. Craft's jealousy was natural as suggested above, but Sibyl Wilbur finds a solution of the frequent removals of Mrs. Eddy and the rumors which reflected on her moral character. She says. "Mrs. Eddy has told the author that her frequent removals during this period from one residence to another was due to the revolutionary character of her teachings It was to the simple minded

that she was constrained to address herself, and to the simplest society. How these uneducated and simple folk were variously wrought upon to receive and reject her compels the narration of many painful episodes. Of these Mary Baker was not unduly mindful." (S. W., p. 176).

This is an explanation that does not explain. To base these "painful episodes" upon the "uneducated and simple folk" cannot account for the stern facts of history which reflect upon the character of Mrs. Eddy.

We next find Mrs. Eddy at the home of Captain Nathaniel Webster, who resided at Amesbury, Mass.; this was in the autumn of 1867. It appears that she here found congenial companionship for a season with Mrs. Webster, who was a Spiritualist medium and a kind, benevolent woman. Mr. William E. Ellis was at this time living in New York with three motherless children, his wife, who was the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Webster having died. In February, 1907, Mary Ellis Bartlett, a daughter of Ellis and a granddaughter of Captain and Mrs. Webster, appeared before Herbert P. Sheldon, Notary Public of the City of Boston, Mass., and

*See Appendix B.

made a lengthy statement under oath concerning Mrs. Eddy with reference to the Quimby controversy. In this statement there is an account of her ejection from the Webster home, from which I beg to submit the following : "Our family had always spent the summer school vacation at my grandparents' home in Amesbury, Mass., and when it was time to leave New York, my father always went to Amesbury in advance of the rest of us, in order to clear my grandmothers' house of

broken-down Spiritualists and such persons My

father, upon first seeing Mrs. Glover in the house, * had told my grandmother that she, Mrs. Glover, should not be

permitted to remain My grandmother, upon being

urged by my father and grandfather to dismiss Mrs. Glover, at last told her that she was no longer welcome and ordered her to go away. Mrs. Glover ignored my grandmother's request and continued to live in the house Failing

to succeed in getting Mrs. Glover to leave the house, my grandmother sent for my father. He arrived in the early evening of the following Saturday. When grandmother had told him of the trouble and how Mrs. Glover refused to go away, she asked my father to see if he could not make Mrs. Glover leave the house. My father commanded Mrs. Glover to leave, and when she steadfastly refused to go, he had her trunk dragged from the room and.set it outside the door, and insisted upon her also going out the door, and when she was outside he closed the door and locked it." (Geo. Mil., pp. 116, 117.) Sibyl Wilbur comes again to the defence of Mrs. Eddy and gives an account of the incident from Mrs. Eddy's view-point; she says in part, "In Sardonic reminiscence the son has related that in spite of his mother's protests he dragged Mrs. Glover's trunk out upon the front veranda, ejected her into the night and storm, and locked the door upon

*After Mrs. Eddy separated from Dr. Patterson, she resumed the name of her former husband — Glover.

her As a matter of fact the incident did not

occur as related by descendants of the family. There was cause for much offense, but the cause decidedly lay not with Mrs. Glover. She left the house of her own volition, left it with the same composure that she had first entered it. And her leaving was justifiable." (S. W., pp. 178, 179.) It is apparent that the two witnesses agree as to the main facts, to-wit: That Mrs. Glover did stop for a time at Captain Webster's, that there was ground for offence and that Mrs. Glover left. The reader in making up his verdict will differentiate between the assertion on the one side and affidavit on the other.

Mrs. Eddy spent about two years in Stoughton at the home of Mr. Wentworth, whose wife studied the Quimby philosophy under Mrs. Eddy. A married son, whose name was Horace T. Wentworth, often visited the home of his parents; also a niece of the Wentworth's, whose name is now Mrs. Catherine I. Clapp, was constantly in and out of the house; so that these two were perfectly conversant with the family affairs. Things moved on smoothly for a season in the Wentworth home, for Mrs. Eddy could render herself exceedingly agreeable, even fascinating, when she so desired. Finally a breech occurred between Mr. Wentworth and Mrs. Eddy. Georgine Milmine says, "Mr.. Wentworth was indignant because Mrs. Glover had attempted to persuade his wife to leave him and go away with her and practice the Quimby treatment. After this Mrs. Glover's former kindly feeling toward the family seemed to disappear." Her conduct was such that the Wentworth's felt impelled to dismiss her. H. T. Wentworth made oath to a statement Feb. 9th, 1907 in Broughton, Mass., from which I quote the following : "Mrs. Wentworth consulted a member of the family as to the best way to bring about Mrs. Glover's departure. By this time my mother was almost in a state of terror regarding Mrs.